Pierre (aka Terdef)

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Pierre (aka Terdef)

  • Rank
    New Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Recent Profile Visitors

1,841 profile views
  1. Bonjour, Le blocage par IP pose évidemment un problème avec les serveurs mutualisés. C'est le cas de free.fr, en France, qui est une sorte de "poil à gratter" de l'Internet et du Web. C'est, entre autre, un énorme FAI, qui permet à ses clients d'héberger gratuitement un ou des sites sur des serveurs dédiés aux "pages personnelles". On estime qu'il y a plus de 100.000 sites web sur ces serveurs. Les miens ont été un temps sur ces serveurs et certains y sont encore. Bloquer une grappe par son IP revient à bloquer des milliers de sites chez tous les utilisateurs de MBAM. http://hosts-file.net/?s= Cordialement Hello, The IP blocking obviously poses a problem with shared servers. This is the case with free.fr, in France, which is a kind with "itching powder" of the Internet and the Web. It is, among other things, a huge ISP, which allows its customers to freely host large websites (100 GO) on servers reserved for the "personal pages". It is estimated that there are over 100,000 websites on these servers. Mine were a time on these servers and some are still there. Block a cluster by IP amounts to block thousands websites for all MBAM users. http://hosts-file.net/?s= Regards
  2. Hi, Windows 10 Updates have been made? The BSOD occurs while there just had updates of MBAM, Bitdefender and Windows 10, so we can't say, in the facts, where does the problem comes from. Regards
  3. I know the code is the same for free and registered. But the result is there. Saying that the free version, that works on demand, is incompatible with Kaspersky products, is at the same level as saying that Windows Explorer is incompatible with Kaspersky products! An assistant (helper) responds to my tutorial, believing, without thinking, the things announced by GSI. I am enraged against this level of stupidity of some helpers who believe all and anything. And I wonder if GSI is not to be classified in the scarewares class. This problem did not start yesterday, ie : http://forum.kaspersky.com/lofiversion/index.php/t132492.html (in 2009) In https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?/topic/107367-malwarebytes-compatibility-kaspersky-pure/?p=535318, please add this link : https://www.malwarebytes.org/pdf/reviews/AVTestingReport.pdf This is when a code is "accessed" with an attempt to execute/run in memory, The term "on-execution" is less known that "on-access". The classic "on-access" mutual exclusion does not exist and MBAM Premium can run alongside any other application "on-access" or "on-execution" (or "on-demand"). A malicious code in a file does not hurt anyone. It sleeps until it is requested for execution. If it is asked to open with notepad or notepad ++, etc. ... nobody risk anything. I'm an evangelist of Kaspersky and MBAM Premium. I use them simultaneously without any problem. Kaspersky attitude with GSI, and especially the message he passed to the assistants (helpers) (since GSI is requested by the assistants to the assistants), not fully informed, irritates me. Cordially ____________________ ps :: is there a limited number of images in a post ?
  4. Hi, What is this story of incompatibility with MBAM that tell us Get System Info (GFI) from Kaspersky, a free tool to test a machine against every software incompatible with Kaspersky tools ? I thought MBAM Premium (real time - On-access), compatible with all antivirus solutions. And, in my case, I have been roundly heckled about my tutorial on how to insert MBAM free (an "on-demand" task) in the sheduler in presence of kaspersky tools. The free MBAM works only "on-demand"! It makes no request for exclusive access to the files (as "on-access" tools do). MBAM free is compatible with everything, all the time. Get System Information (GFI) find that all world security features are incompatible with Kaspersky products. His message is clear: "Throw out all, that I put myself." It's only bullying. It's a lie! Is there anything I should know? Cordially ______________________________________________________________________________________________ My tutorial (In French) - Copyleft Comment lancer une analyse antimalwares automatique, avec la version gratuite de Malwarebytes Anti-Malware (MBAM), au démarrage de Windows, cette fonction n'étant normalement prévue que dans la version PRO (Premium) de MBAM. Pour décontaminer un ordinateur (malveillances réelles et / ou trucs indésirables ou simplement superflus - hors virus), on utilise divers outils (gratuits ou en version gratuite pour les produits commerciaux). Aucun de ces outils (en version gratuite pour ceux ayant une version commerciale et une version gratuite) ne travaille en temps réel (On-access) mais uniquement à la demande (On-Demand). Si vous voulez que l'un d'entre eux soit lancé automatiquement au démarrage de Windows, pour faire une analyse rapide du système, ce sera MBAM (Malwarebytes Anti Malware), sans l'ombre d'un doute. Toutefois, pour lancer la version gratuite de MBAM (Malwarebytes Anti Malware) automatiquement au démarrage de Windows, il faut faire un petit réglage dans les « tâches planifiées » (dans le « planificateur de tâches ») car cela n'est pas prévu de base. La version la plus à jour de la procédure suivante se trouve toujours ici Procédure : Clic sur le « Bouton Démarrer de Windows »Dans la boîte de recherche, saisir taskschd.mscClic sur taskschd.msc (ouverture du planificateur de tâches) Dans le volet de droite, clic sur « Créer une tâche de base... » Dans la fenêtre de l'assistant de création d'une tâche qui vient de s'ouvrir, donner un nom à votre convenance à la tâche planifiée. Par exemple : Analyse MBAM au démarrage de WindowsAjoutez, éventuellement, un commentaire (ou laissez vide)Clic sur le bouton Suivant Dans la fenêtre de sélection de l'évènement déclancheur, sélectionnez « Au démarrage de l’ordinateur »Clic sur le bouton Suivant Dans la fenêtre de type d'action à effectuer, sélectionnez « Démarrer un programme »Clic sur le bouton Suivant Dans la fenêtre de sélection du programme à lancer, clic sur le bouton Parcourir Localisez l'emplacement de votre installation de MBAM (Malwarebytes Anti Malware). Là, sélectionnez mbam.exeClic sur le bouton Ouvrir Dans le champ « Ajouter des arguments (facultatif) : », saisissez (recopiez), tel quel, espaces compris /scan -quick -terminateClic sur le bouton Suivant Clic sur le bouton Terminer A partir de maintenant, chaque fois que l'ordinateur sous Windows démarrera, MBAM (Malwarebytes Anti Malware), effectura : Une analyse (le switch « /scan »)L'analyse sera de type rapide (le switch « /quick »)Le switch « –terminate » ordonne à MBAM de se fermer après une analyse si aucune menace n’a été trouvée. Si quelque chose que MBAM pense malveillant est trouvé, l'interface MBAM reste ouvert pour vous laisser choisir le sort à réserver à la chose.
  5. Hi Marcin, MBAM makes good choices, as usual. There is a certain timidity of decontamination business solutions about PUPs, Adwares, and so on... I remember https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?/topic/110784-false-positive-case-very-urgent/ or what Microsoft done, dealing with advocates, under the pretext of contract accepted by the end users, even if without their knowledge, after the acquisition of Giant AntiSpyware (December 16, 2004), an antispyware promised a bright future, killed by Microsoft. May the choice of MBAM cause a noticeable brake on the practices of bundlewares, trapped downloaders, repack and sponsoring without the knowledge of the user, or without his informed consent. May the choice of MBAM cause a noticeable brake on the forced promotion of poor softwares or totally useless, that have no other options to be sold that catching victims while raping their computers. May the choice of MBAM put a considerable brake on the flowering of pseudo solutions, unnecessary, dangerous, proceeding on fear (scareware), or purely for extortion. Thanks a lot for all.
  6. Hi, I spoke a little about that around me. I'm speechless. The notions of Opt-In and Opt-Out seem forgotten or ignored! This is something so old that it seems granted, and that we no longer discuss about it. Need we recall that we are all under the authority of the Opt-Out that governs us? All works, from Do Not Track (DNT) of the Mozilla Foundation, to tools like Unchecky or PC Decrapifier, are developed, with little success, because of the regime of the Opt-Out under which we are. Tons of struggles against Pups - Potentially Unwanted Program, daily, are developed because of the regime of the Opt-Out under which we are. All tools such as: MBAMAdwCleanerJunkware Removal Tool (JRT)ZHPCleanerEtc. ...are developed, in large part, because of the regime of the Opt-Out under which we are. The Toolbars settled because of the regime of the Opt-Out under which we are. How many times assistants (helpers), on decontamination forums, recommend an application to someone saying "Paid attention, when installing, to surely uncheck the box xxx, otherwise, the application yyy will settle down with. " "Unchecking the boxes", when not hidden or nonexistent, or with a misleading meaning, is making an Opt-Out we are forced to. But who understands what means these pre checked boxes and dishonesty deliveries or options so warmly recommended. Nobody reads the contracts nor look at anything around the "Download" button or the "Install" button. We are under the Opt-Out regime for so long, that we no more pay attention to the repacking, the sponsoring, etc. ... This has become something normal. This decision by the French Council of State is sovereign and founded a jurisprudence that is not open to interpretation in one sense by a judge, in another sense by another judge. The company referred to in that decision, tuto4pc.com, plans to climb to the European Court, which took protective positions of Internet users, recently, facing Google. I think something important has just happened. Cordially
  7. Hi, Something important has just happened in France. The Council of State, the highest administrative court, has decided to the obligation of the Opt-In. This is still frowned upon in its consequences as we see, for many, a simple slowing bundle, repack, etc. ... This happened in the context of a dispute between an advertising agency and the CNIL (National Commission for Computing and freedoms) An analysis in French: Le Conseil d’État se prononce pour l'Opt-in contre l'Opt-out Sincerely
  8. Hi, Did you take them ? Thanks
  9. Hi, Here they are : Link to FRST.txt (when MBAM is not active) : http://cjoint.com/?3FBteJoGLrI Link to Addition.txt : http://cjoint.com/?3FBthK21at1 Link to CheckResult-1 (when MBAM is not active) : http://cjoint.com/?3FBtj2e3h2d Lien vers CheckResult (when MBAM is active) : http://cjoint.com/?3FBtkH2Ae4E Edit : Link to FRST.txt (when MBAM is active) : http://cjoint.com/?3FBtwtzfEzu For privacy reasons, these files are volatile (4 days). Thanks
  10. Hello, I meet a case, for a user, for which I remain unanswered. Avast IS and MBAM, legal and updated, coexist without problems ... apparently, and in any case, no one treats the other as a virus or threat. What happens is that at the slightest update or reinstallation of Avast, if MBAM is active at the time of the update, everything seems to go normally, and, at the restart the computer, we can see the AVAST services activ, and the AVAST resident program activ, but there is no more icon in the systray, and the AVAST GUI is no longer accessible. The AVAST firewall and antivirus are considered active by Windows, but, in reality, they let all pass thru (tested with sites normally blocked by AVAST and classic false positives such as games cracks). There is no error message to indicate that there is a concern, it's just when monitoring the security that we realize that AVAST agents are residents but innaccessibles and do not work. By cons, without MBAM resident (and with V 2, it requires not only that it is not resident, but also the active services must be manually disabled), no problem with AVAST. A month of discussions, in French, on the AVAST board, between people who have the same problem (almost all under Win 7 64 but not all) and nothing found, including AVAST technicians. Clarification: When it is said that Avast is visible in the Program Manager, but the GUI is no longer available and no longer appears in the taskbar, it is only true for restarts that come from the user (cold (power off - power on) or hot (restart) reboot). By cons, and this is curious, if the restart is ordered by AVAST (after installation/reinstallation) or by another program (like a Windows update, or an install of a driver or a program) with a window like " A restart is required to complete ... ", then everything is ok ... What is done somewhere (startup list ?...). Anybody has an idea ? Note: The user has three machines. The other two have the same configuration (AVAST IS + MBAM) and the problem does not arise. One that has the problem is a little more subject to install / uninstall of softwares, and has not been reformatted for 2 years. The other two are less stressed. A cause and effect?
  11. Hi S!Ri Good news and thanks for the very fast reaction. Thanks
  12. Hi all, It's been awhile. The adamc promise did not changed anything. There is more than a year now. Here is the page where I specifically mentione the problem of the use of a downloader on the website mentioned in this thread. 01Net.com Same for Telecharger.com We, implicated in IT security and privacy protection, reject the idea that a website can deliver something other than what is required. This is based on deception behavior. The use of a downloader is done without the knowledge of the user. These are not small gray letters on a gray background or a micro question mark to click that clears the service website in question of its turpitudes. The downloader is unsolicited, so this is a PUP, at least (without presuming the other activities that it can have after a successful connection). The scandals incline us to totally boycott the sites using a downloader. Whatever is the attitude of the site in question, it is a matter of principle. After the scandal of C|Net (Download.com), major download sites give the finger to internet users and software developpers! They still use a downloader, under their big buttons "Download", clearly visible and where everyone rushes. They simply add, very quietly, very small, almost invisible and without explanation for its presence, a link called "Direct Link" or "Direct Download Link", etc.. ... when there is one, or a micro question mark, to click, in a location that does not holds the attention of anyone. The downloader used by 01net.com is made by (signed by) NextRadioTV. NextRadioTV is the group with BFM TV, RMC and Tests Group (owner of the websites 01Net, 01Men and CadresOnline and magazines Micro Hebdo, L'Ordinateur Individuel and 01 Informatique). NextRadioTV is a major player in the Internet advertising and the first operator in the new media technologies. The downloader delivers advertising. This is an adware, a class of software that we have been hunting down for over fifteen years as parasites, as well as viruses. Any software installed without the knowledge of the user and without of his informed consent should be considered a cybercrime. I do think MBAM should recognize this and eradicate it. Regards